docker_remove_container

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description must disclose the destructive nature and side effects. It only states 'Remove a Docker container' without explicitly stating that this is permanent, that confirmation is required, or that running containers need force. The word 'Remove' implies deletion, but the description fails to convey the full impact.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, concise sentence that effectively states the core purpose without any fluff. It is front-loaded and easy to parse.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Despite having only 3 parameters and an output schema, the tool is destructive and lacks any description of confirmation or force requirements. The sparse description leaves critical safety context absent, making it incomplete for a tool with no annotations.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, and each parameter has a clear description in the schema. The tool description adds no extra meaning about parameters, so the baseline of 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'Remove a Docker container.' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly differentiating it from sibling tools like docker_stop and docker_logs. It is unambiguous and immediately understandable.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites such as stopping the container first or when to use the force parameter. The parameter descriptions in the schema hint at these, but the tool description itself lacks any usage context.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.